PUBLIC HEARINGS (7:31pm) Ordinance No. 11-01, An Ordinance To Authorize The Annexation Of Contiguous Land Belonging To The Village To The Village Of Granville. No one appeared to speak for or against the Ordinance. Mayor Robertson closed the public hearing at 7:31pm.

Ordinance No. 12-01, An Ordinance To Amend Sections 1137.01, 1143.01, 1143.02, 1171.02, 1171.03, and 1171.04 Of The Codified Ordinances Of The Village Of Granville, Ohio To Revise The Administrative Procedure For Applications For Approval Of Development Plans In Planned Development Districts To Conform To The Decision Of The Supreme Court Of Ohio In State Ex Rel. Crossman Communities Of Ohio Inc. v. Greene Cty. Bd. Of Elections That Approval Of Such Plans Is A Legislative Act. Jim Jump, 143 Thresher Street, stated he was present, as the principal drafter of the Ordinance, to answer questions. Mayor Robertson closed the public hearing at 7:33pm.

Ordinance No. 13-01, An Ordinance To Amend Chapters 309 Of The Granville Codified Ordinances, Establishing Penalties For Violations Committed By Drivers Of Overweight And Oversize Commercial Trucks. No one appeared to speak for or against the ordinance. Mayor Robertson closed the public hearing at 7:34pm.

NEW BUSINESS (7:34pm) Resolution No. 01-39, A Resolution To Authorize The Village Manager To Enter Into Negotiations For The Sale Of Water To Kendal Of Granville, was introduced by Vice Mayor Wernet, on behalf of himself and Mayor Robertson. Second by Councilmember Crais.

Discussion: Vice Mayor Wernet reiterated his and Mayor Robertson’s conviction that Kendal could be an important contributor to the community and Council should be openly welcoming. Mayor Robertson asserted that this would not be extension, per se, since it concerns water only, from a line that is already there. Also, selling water to Kendal would not promote further development because the boundary properties are either unlikely or impossible to be developed. She added that a majority of people responding to the question in the Comprehensive Plan Survey wanted this kind of development and that it would also produce tax revenues for the schools. Vice Mayor Wernet noted there are legal reasons behind the distinction between water-only and water-and-sewer since sewer is the “development-feeding vehicle.”

Councilmember Crais asked for identification of the surrounding properties. Mayor Robertson stated the Kendal land was “pretty much blocked in,” with Owens-Corning (which already has village water) and Township green-space land. Tom Mitchell, with Kendal of Granville, confirmed, stating that Owens abuts the west boundary as well as some of the north boundary since their land runs straight through from S.R. 37 to S.R. 16. The rest of the north boundary is Township green space. Some commercially zoned property fronting S.R. 16 is on the east. Vice Mayor Wernet verified that those areas on S.R. 16 have long been slated for intensive commercial development. Mr. Mitchell noted that the Kendal land is already zoned R-1.

Councilmember Crais asked for clarification of the extension v. selling distinction. Mayor Robertson stated that “extension” meant that someone would be building brand new lines and is commonly used to keep something else from happening (e.g., an annexation). In the Kendal case, Village water lines are already out there.

Councilmember Crais asked what an agreement with Kendal would look like and if it might be similar to our agreement with Alexandria. Mayor Robertson responded that we won’t know until conversations/negotiations have occurred. Councilmember Lucier agreed that cooperation with Kendal is in the interests of the entire community but expressed concern that some general parameters for the negotiation need to be established up front—specifically price and quantity. Manager Hickman noted that any Kendal agreement would quite probably resemble Village agreements with Owens and Alexandria. He added that he would like to have one or two members of Council involved in the negotiations. Vice Mayor Wernet said he envisioned a bulk-purchase agreement that included limiting water usage to Kendal purposes only.

Councilmember Moore asked why there was nothing in the proposed resolution about a requirement for annexation, as per Council’s most recent discussions on that topic. Vice Mayor Wernet responded that this was not extension since we were using an existing tap—a distinction that Councilmember Moore thought was not valid. Vice Mayor Wernet stated that an annexation requirement was indeed Council’s general rule but that this is a unique situation. Councilmember Moore responded that, while she has always supported extending sewer and water for specific purposes, she still wanted an explanation about why Council would give water to a private entity for a high-end senior citizen facility but not to their own schools. Vice Mayor Wernet reiterated that this is a different scenario than that of the schools.

Councilmember Crais expressed a desire to add instructions for the Manager to the resolution to facilitate the negotiations. He noted that Mayor Robertson’s remarks about potential development impact being virtually non-existent had adequately answered his conviction that it was incumbent on Council to apply that test to this instance. He also felt, however, that Council would be making a mistake to argue this all out at the current meeting as opposed to raising the important issues, amending the resolution as needed—without “anticipating the minutiae”— then coming back to the issue at a subsequent meeting. Mayor Robertson emphasized that she sees this resolution as serving to initiate a negotiation, nothing more.

Councilmember McGowan stated he would like to see notice of this in the Sentinel so the public could comment before Council’s vote, adding that he would have preferred this process to have been initiated by a formal request from Kendal rather than by Council itself. He remarked that the School Board might also welcome water-only, then asked for confirmation that the result of any negotiations must come back to Council for approval. (True.) He questioned whether or not we would receive taxes for the schools since Kendal is a registered non-profit, asked about the distance from the existing water line to the main Kendal building, and wondered if granting water-only to Kendal would compel Council to do so in response to others’ requests. In short, he was concerned that Council was going forward before being asked to do so, and felt the school issue should be revisited.

Councilmember Lucier asked for clarification of the process. Mayor Robertson and Manager Hickman responded that the resolution currently on the table would simply authorize negotiations. Satisfactory negotiations would be followed by an ordinance, with the water-only agreement as an official attachment. Any ordinance would be referendable. Councilmember Lucier wondered if it would be productive for members of Council to participate in discussions/negotiations at the level of determining the specifics of the agreement. Vice Mayor Wernet urged everyone to pull together “behind something that’s good.” Councilmember Bellman agreed with Councilmember Lucier, stating that whoever negotiated would obviously have everyone’s input and Council could address details of the agreement once the results of Manager Hickman’s negotiations were reported back. Councilmember Moore expressed concern that the resolution was too vague (i.e., “What exactly are we telling Manager Hickman to do?”), perhaps leaving room for policy decisions to be made without due consideration applied to issues of traffic, density, appropriateness within the plan, access by bike paths, etc. Councilmember Crais moved to amend Section 2, as follows: “These negotiations shall include but shall not be limited to issues such as price, quantity, agreement with the Comprehensive Plan, and the development impact of the sale of the water to Kendal at Granville.” Second by Vice Mayor Wernet, who then called the question. Motion-to- amend carried. Councilmember Moore moved to change “negotiations” to “discussions” everywhere it appears in the document. Second by Councilmember McGowan. Councilmember Crais called the question. Motion-to-amend carried. Vice Mayor Wernet called the question on the resolution as amended. Motion as amended carried.

Resolution No. 01.40, A Resolution To Authorize The Village Manager To Seek Bids For Street Improvements Including Sunrise, Granger, and N. Pearl Streets And Associated Alternatives, was introduced by Councilmember Crais. Second by Vice Mayor Wernet. Manager Hickman clarified that this involved extensive work on all listed areas (i.e., milling, curbing, repaving, sidewalks, and even some widening on Sunrise Street). Councilmember Crais moved to amend to Resolution to insert “East College Street” between Sunrise and Granger, as previously discussed. Second by Councilmember McGowan. Motion-to-amend passed. Manager Hickman asked that the Resolution be approved at this meeting so the project(s) could go to bid; Council could amend at a subsequent meeting if so desired. Motion-as- amended carried,

OLD BUSINESS (8:12pm) [Councilmember Crais requested Ordinance No. 13-01 be considered out of order since he had to leave the meeting early. All agreed.]

Ordinance No. 13-01, An Ordinance To Amend Chapter 309 Of The Granville Codified Ordinances, Establishing Penalties For Violations Committed By Drivers Of Overweight And Oversize Commercial Trucks, was re-introduced by Councilmember Crais. Second by Vice Mayor Wernet.

Discussion: Manager Hickman clarified that this was intended to bring the Village fine schedule into line with the State schedule. Councilmember Crais added this ordinance would allow offenders to be cited in Mayor’s Court and charged under Village ordinances, thereby allowing the Village to retain any fines levied. Councilmember McGowan asked if an offender could elect to appear in Municipal Court. Law Director Crites said he thought not, but would verify his opinion.

Ordinance No. 11-01, An Ordinance To Authorize The Annexation Of Contiguous Land Belonging To The Village To The Village Of Granville, was re-introduced by Councilmember Lucier. Second by Councilmember Moore.

Discussion: Councilmember Lucier explained that approximately two years ago she had asked Village staff to determine what land fit these criteria. The issue was sidetracked by having the merger study on ballot, which put annexations on hold. After the merger study was defeated, she again requested this be looked into, having the conviction that land that belongs to the Village should be under the legal jurisdiction of the Village. For example, Fanchion Lewis Park is Village land, situated in the Township and patrolled by Village police (out of their jurisdiction). Councilmember Moore asked Law Director Crites whether Village police could legally patrol outside Village limits. He responded that they could but that there is no automatic right to cite individuals for violations of the Village Codified Ordinances just because the Village owns the land, absent an agreement with the Sheriff’s Department or some other provision of law. Manager Hickman assured Council that the Township Trustees had been given notice of this resolution and had no concerns even though the park frontage includes part of the road. The Manager and the Law Director will work out the details. Law Director Crites stated that he would research the issue further, “on the house,” so he would have the definitive answer. Councilmember Moore thought perhaps having Village land that was not a physical part of the Village might serve as a buffer against annexations and/or requests for water and sewer. Councilmember Lucier noted that others cannot annex without our permission, negating the need for a buffer. Vice Mayor Wernet observed that accomplishing the annexation would make it less easy for anyone else to annex because Council would be “removing any vote a future council might have.” Vice Mayor Wernet called the question.

[Note: At 8:21pm, just prior to the conclusion of the discussion, Councilmember Crais excused himself. Prior to departing, he offered some comments on the Recreation Center issue to be discussed under “Other” later in the meeting: he would support the committee but felt it was important that a community recreation center be as close to the Village center as possible to best support pedestrian traffic. Vice Mayor Wernet moved to excuse his departure. Second by Councilmember McGowan. Motion carried.]

Ordinance No. 12-01, An Ordinance To Amend Sections 1137.01, 1143.01, 1143.02, 1171.02, 1171.03, and 1171.04 Of The Codified Ordinances Of The Village Of Granville, Ohio To Revise The Administrative Procedure For Applications For Approval Of Development Plans In Planned Development Districts To Conform To The Decision Of The Supreme Court Of Ohio In State Ex Rel. Crossman Communities Of Ohio Inc. v. Greene County Bd. Of Elections That Approval Of Such Plans Is A Legislative Act, and to Declare An Emergency, was re-introduced by Councilmember Lucier. Second by Vice Mayor Wernet.

Discussion: James Jump, 143 Thresher Street, gave some history on this issue, with which he has been involved since the original SuperAmerica applications (for S.R. 16 @ Cherry Valley Road) came to the Planning Commission. Former Law Director Hurst investigated the process/substance for PUD/PCD applications and determined that it was administrative and therefore appealable. Former Law Director Hurst and Mr. Jump then wrote the current ordinance, including an elaborate appeals process. In 1998, however, the Ohio Supreme Court (State Ex Rel. Crossman Communities of Ohio Inc. v. Greene County Board of Elections) declared PUD/PCD processes to be legislative (and therefore referendable). The current ordinance is presented to bring Village’s codified ordinances into compliance with the State of Ohio.

Changes to 1137.01 back out the appeal process framework. Changes to 1171 et.al. take PUD/PCD standards and/or requirements and make them guidelines. Changes to 1143 clean up the wording on how to amend zoning ordinances. Regulations would now apply to individual citizens rather than developers.

Councilmember Moore asked for clarification that, having deleted parts of the code that relate to appeal on any PUD, the remedy is now to take it to referendum. Mr. Jump responded that if the legislative body (i.e., Council) doesn’t act, there is no remedy short of the electoral process. Councilmember Lucier asked why Council would want this to be an emergency. Mr. Jump responded that the Village needs to be in compliance as quickly as possible. Since there is “nothing in the pipeline as of today,” (Manager Hickman) if approved at the current meeting, the Village would be able to provide accurate information and regulations in full compliance for the next applicant. Vice Mayor Wernet thanked Mr. Jump for his extensive efforts on this issue.

Law Director Crites proposed a change in the language of the Ordinance to comply with Section 3.05 of the Charter, requiring reasons to be set forth for such an emergency to exist, by adding: “…and its inhabitants and necessary to ensure that the codified ordinances of the village of Granville related to the approval of the development plans in planned development districts conform to the decision of the Supreme Court of Ohio in State Ex Rel Crossman v. Greene County Board of Elections thereby diminishing the risk of potential litigation for failure to conform its ordinances to the aforementioned Ohio Supreme Court decision.” Vice Mayor Wernet moved the amendment. Second by Councilmember Lucier.

Discussion on the amendment: Councilmember Moore asked what the consequences would be if Council did not make these changes. Law Director Crites responded that the entire Village process would be counter to the Ohio Supreme Court decision. In short, before 1997, we were “right where we needed to be,” treating final approval as a legislative act. Then, as a result of decisions made in 1999, we made everything an administrative proceeding, with specific guidelines given to the Planning Commission. Now, the Ohio Supreme Court has ruled the process is legislative so we need to revise the appeal procedures and refer to the authority given to the Planning Commission as guidelines, not standards. If no changes were adopted at the current meeting and someone came in tomorrow to start the process, we would have to treat it as an administrative procedure, which is not consistent with the Ohio Supreme Court, and would risk the Village’s ending up in litigation for not complying. Councilmember Lucier added that we would also be doing a disservice to people who think they’re doing everything right. Motion-to-amend carried.

Resolution No. 01-32, A Resolution To Appoint Members To The Granville Tree And Landscape Commission. Councilmember Moore moved to take the Resolution off the table. Second by Vice Mayor Wernet. Motion carried. The Resolution was re- introduced by Vice Mayor Wernet. Second by Councilmember Moore. Discussion: Mayor Robertson commented that she agreed with a letter she had received from Jim Siegel (saying that having a person from outside the Village on the Commission was a good idea) and hoped to enlarge the commission by one person who could represent the Township. The appointments for the two vacancies covered by this resolution could still be made at the current meeting. Councilmember Lucier, after reiterating that the point of the delay had been to provide ample opportunity for citizens to express interest, stated she felt one should be a Village resident to serve on a Village commission. Councilmember Bellman said her argument was persuasive in the instance of bodies such as the Planning Commission or the BZBA, but felt the Tree & Landscape Commission was different—less policy-oriented. less zoning-oriented, and more focused on beautification of the downtown area. Many people besides Village residents already contribute labor to that effort. Councilmember Lucier urged Manager Hickman to continue his efforts to clarify the status of this commission. Members of Council voted by written ballot. Manager Hickman and Law Director Crites tabulated the results. Mayor Robertson announced that Lynn Kishler (Section 2) and Bill Seegers (Section 1) had been elected, completing the intent of the Resolution. Motion carried.

[Mayor Robertson asked Manager Hickman to figure out the formalities of enlarging the commission by one person. He will include that with the rest of his report on the Commission.]

MAYOR'S COURT REPORT (8:55pm) The Mayor's Court Report for the month of April was presented for review. Vice Mayor Wernet moved to accept the report; second by Councilmember Bellman. Motion carried. Mayor Robertson directed the report be filed with the Clerk. A copy of said report is attached as part of these minutes.

MANAGER'S REPORT (8:57pm) The Manager's Report for the month of March was presented for review. Vice Mayor Wernet moved to accept the report; second by Councilmember Bellman. Councilmember Lucier asked Manager Hickman to investigate herbicide use to determine quantities used and time spent. She also requested Manager Hickman to verify the tax revenues for the first quarter of 2001. Motion carried. Mayor Robertson directed the report be filed with the Clerk. A copy of said report is attached as part of these minutes.

REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF MINUTES (9:01pm) Regularly Scheduled Meeting of May 2, 2001. The following additions/corrections were requested: 1) Councilmember Lucier, p. 1, 2nd paragraph of Union Cemetery Board Annual Meeting – add, “Flo Hoffman thanked both bodies for their constant support. Both bodies thanked Flo Hoffman as well. 2) Mayor Robertson, p. 2, Discussion of Joint Economic Development Study – delete, “She also asked if Ms. Wimberger could/would survey Denison students, including looking at the students’ own survey on this topic, to determine their needs. Ms. Wimberger responded that her data-gathering this quarter included that survey. 3) Mayor Robertson, p. 6, under NOTE – delete, “Council took a five- minute break and reconvened….” 4) Mayor Robertson, p. 7, 1st sentence – insert, “Mayor Robertson reported that Denison applies penalties to students pleading guilty or being found guilty in Mayor’s Court. One of the penalties she imposes….” Councilmember Lucier moved to accept the Minutes as amended. Second by Councilmember McGowan. Motion carried.

Newark-Granville Joint Committee (Mayor Robertson) Councilmember Bellman announced that Craig Baldwin would be resigning and said it was a “great loss” to the work of the committee.

Personnel Committee (Councilmember McGowan). No report. Manager Hickman reported that he had put out RFPs for the staff study but has not yet had any formal responses. He has some different avenues in mind, and Councilmember Lucier will add her ideas as well.

Planning Commission (Councilmember Lucier). No report.

Rec Commission (Councilmember McGowan). Councilmember McGowan reported that he and Councilmember Moore had attended the formal dedication of Raccoon Park, during which the park was referred to by one of the speakers as a “jewel of our community.”

Street Light Committee (Councilmember McGowan). Councilmember McGowan reported that all the new lights are up but the last half-dozen (waiting for painting). Manager Hickman noted that he had gotten positive feedback about the light installed at the intersection of Jones and Newark- Granville Roads. Streets, Sidewalks & Utilities Committee (Vice Mayor Wernet). Vice Mayor Wernet reported that the last meeting had been dominated in large part by input into the resolution on street repairs approved earlier in the meeting. The Committee members also discussed the general concept of a pedestrian-friendly set of standards that would apply to all streets and sidewalks in the Village. They are reviewing the standards of the city of Portland which seem to have incorporated all the thoughts currently under consideration for Granville. Their goal is to make sure we’re doing everything possible to make Village intersections as safe as they can be for both pedestrians and vehicles. The proposed standards will be brought to Council.

Tree & Landscape Committee (Councilmember Moore). Manager Hickman reported that the Tree & Landscape Committee will be visiting the Planning Commission in an effort to better mesh the design and horticultural considerations of an application. Both have good intentions but their respective roles need to be clarified, along with the issue of who has the final word when their recommendations conflict. Manager Hickman noted that current practice is for a landscaping plan to go to Tree & Landscape for review. That body has 30 days to issue comment. If they do not, the Planning Commission can make its own recommendations. The Planning commission currently has final authority but Tree & Landscape feels this is their area of expertise. Councilmember Lucier asked that Manager Hickman provide the Planning Commission with the documentation on Tree & Landscape once it has been identified. Union Cemetery Board (Councilmember Lucier). Councilmember Lucier announced that the annual tour of the Old Colony Cemetery was scheduled for May 31st and invited all members of Council to attend.

OTHER (9:15pm) Recreation Center Review Committee – General consensus among members of Council was that this was being presented as if the site selection had already been determined. All members present (including Councilmember Crais, who had weighed in on this issue before leaving the meeting earlier) felt a central-Village location that would be easily accessible by cyclists and pedestrians was preferable to the Kendal location. There was concern that appointment members to the review committee might be construed as tacit approval of the proposal. All agreed that the two requested representatives should be members of Council, since they alone could fully express Council’s reservations. Councilmember Lucier suggested that Councilmember McGowan, as a member of the Rec Commission, was the logical choice for one of the two slots. Mayor Robertson volunteered to be the other representative. Vice Mayor Wernet asked if it would be productive to form a general committee with no pre-selected site. Councilmember Moore felt that Council’s two representatives to the committee already proposed could press that point. Mayor Robertson agreed, stating that Council’s message could be forwarded ahead of time, then the two representatives could attend the first meeting and emphasize the point in person. She also thought than would accomplish Vice Mayor Wernet’s suggestion about having the agenda changed.

Resolution No. 01-27, A Resolution To Amend The Village Of Granville Rules Of The Village. Councilmember Lucier moved to remove the resolution from the table. Second by Councilmember McGowan. Motion carried.

Discussion on Sections C and D: Section C: Councilmember Moore asked that the language throughout this section be changed to refer to both ordinances and resolutions. It was decided that submissions should go to Manager Hickman who can then see that they are sent to Law Director Crites and officially submitted to the Clerk of Council. Vice Mayor Wernet asked how ad hoc instances would be handled. Councilmember McGowan asked that emergency procedures be specified. In C.3., a reading of the title rather than the “summary” will constitute a complete reading. In C.4., the language will be changed to “celebrate outstanding contributions and worthwhile events.”

Section D: Councilmember Lucier questioned the practice/appropriateness of a public body using secret ballots and suggested that Council votes should be public in all cases. Councilmember Bellman and Vice Mayor Wernet disagreed, stating there were times when secret ballots would be appropriate. Councilmember Moore suggested a “bifurcated” approach, with some ballots being secret, some not. Mayor Robertson suggested that someone advance some language on this issue and Council would continue to think about it. Law Director Crites noted that this point is not addressed in any of the documents he has reviewed to date but he will continue to pursue it. He added that all written ballots are kept as part of the public record. Councilmember Moore noted that secret ballots are not specified in the Sunshine Law code either. At Mayor Robertson’s request, he clarified that abstentions simply don’t count in a vote. Vice Mayor moved to re-table Resolution 01-27. Second by Councilmember Moore. Motion carried.

OTHER (9:52pm) Mayor Robertson asked Manager Hickman to copy a letter from Catherine Smith re the public-use fee charged with purchase of new house and distribute it to all members of Council. It will be on the agenda of the next regular meeting.

Councilmember Moore noted she will be absent from May 22 through June 6, accompanying a group of Ohio Northern students to Cuba.

The business of the Executive Session being concluded at 10:48pm, Councilmember McGowan moved to end the Executive Session. Second by Vice Mayor Wernet. A roll call vote yielded six (6) affirmative votes: Councilmembers Bellman, Lucier, McGowan, and Moore; Vice Mayor Wernet, Mayor Robertson.